Tape drive address ownership
I have a question regarding ownership of a tape address when more than one system has access to the control unit. It is my understanding that since the time of the 3480 control unit, a switch or electronic latch is set in the CU when an address is ATTACHed (VM) or ALLOCated (MVS) and that the latch prevents another system from attaching or allocating that same address. When the address is freed by being detached from the id on VM or unallocated on MVS, the latch is immediately reset indicating that the address is available. Am I correct in the above. We occasionally see situations between or VM lpars and MVS lpars where an address has been detached from VM but is not available on MVS. It is DFSMS on MVS that is trying to allocate the address. If a CP Q TA is issued on VM, and the reply is An active tape was not found is there any way that the VM lpar could still own an address? Jim Jim Bohnsack Cornell Univ. (607) 255-1760
Re: Off Subject Programming and retraining
I can agree with all that has been said but can also rebuke most of it even with my limited knowledge. The VB Studio product is a reasonable attempt to set standards for the programming model. I've been told it looks a lot like Websphere Studio. I agree that the exam is no means to measure ability. I am scoring at a passing level now and I have attempted only one actual form application. There is a high level of effort in the product for supporting the older COM applications and other, so called, unmanaged code. A surprise considering the corporate history of leaving things behind. That leaves the actual object model in comparison to the traditional methods of conducting business. I'd like to find criticism here but the potential of objects and the methods behind them are far reaching. To far to be dismissed. My time left in this business is limited but I jumped into a bottomless pit from the beginning and to find it getting deeper is just part of the ride. Thanks for the comments. Steve Domarski 352-368-8350 Property Appraisers Office Marion County Florida USA Edward M. Martin To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: .comSubject: Re: Off Subject Programming and retraining Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System [EMAIL PROTECTED] UARK.EDU 05/13/2006 02:10 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System Hello Dave, Good Rant. And I agree on all your points. I think that you need to have one more point for problems though. 4) no Standards for PC programmers. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-588-4723 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ext. 40441 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Wade Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 12:39 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Off Subject Programming and retraining /* start of rant */ Can I beg to differ. On the PC platform VB is perfectly usable for 99% of projects. The biggest problem with most software projects are not choice of platform or choice of implementation language. The biggest problems are :- 1) Not defining what you actually want the system to do. 2) Changing (1) after work gas started. 3) Expecting technology to solve what are people or process problems. 4) Expecting a system to do everything, inlcuding make the tea, without any management.
Re: and now a VM:Tape question
I would like to see a copy of your code. I have to built an eject process for our IFL and would like to consider such an automatic ejection. Thanks for your help. /Tom Kern On Mon, 15 May 2006 07:55:28 +0300, Shimon Lebowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] w rote: We do it with no exits, and in fact, with no VM:Tape. (Sorry JR). The output listing from the VM:Backup job goes to a service virtual machine (LSTNLYZ) which analyzes *many* of our standard job listings and deals with standard housekeeping. The routine for the backup submits DFSMSRM commands to eject the offsite (outa sight!) tape copies from the library. I will be happy to share code if you are interested. Shimon
Re: Water cooling -- was: (off topic) sump pump
Hey sales has to find something different to sell. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-588-4723 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ext. 40441 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Brock Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 11:21 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Water cooling -- was: (off topic) sump pump The phrase water-powered reminds me of something I just learned in a meeting: having moved from water-cooled to air-cooled mainframe hardware years ago, we have now reached the point where our Windows servers need . . . yes, you guessed it, water cooling! It seems a raised floor and controlled tempreatures are no longer sufficient for racks of blades. I realize this is not exactly uncommon, but, still, I can but shake my head at the irony. Jon snip I suggest a search using keywords like +sump pump +backup +water powered /snip
Virtual memory implementation in S/370
(I wrote) VAX uses a two level system where page tables are paged. There is kernel space, which isn't paged and holds the first level tables referencing pagable second level tables. z/Archtecture has three levels. (someone else wrote) Actually, z/Architecture has 5 levels. So far, the existed hardware only uses 3 of them. I thought of that right after sending it. Above the addressing within a page, it is, more or less, 10 bits per level. (For S/370, one could consider the 32 bit addressing for the 360/67, which is fairly similar.) For an undergrad operating system course I did a report comparing S/370 and VAX virtual memory systems (around the time when VAX was new). I remember finding more similarities than differences, especially both using the two level system. So for 64 bit addressing of 4K pages, (64-12)/10 is about five. Allowing the hardware to use three until more addressing bits are needed is a nice feature. -- glen
Upgrading zVM 5.1 to 5.2
OK, I have ordered service to upgrade our z/VM from 5.1 to 5.2. (At least, I think I have. I got two 3480 cartridges containing UM97520.) I don't see a 5.2 version of the "Guide for Automated Installation and Service." I'm assuming I should use the one for 5.1. After all, I'm actually applying the service to a 5.1 system anyway. Besides, the 5.1 and 5.2 manualsshould be pretty much identical, right? Thanks, Jon
Re: Upgrading zVM 5.1 to 5.2
Title: Message That sounds like a PUT, not upgrade, you should get about 19 tapes to upgrade from 5.1. to 5.2 -Original Message-From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon BrockSent: Monday, May 15, 2006 2:49 PMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Upgrading zVM 5.1 to 5.2 OK, I have ordered service to upgrade our z/VM from 5.1 to 5.2. (At least, I think I have. I got two 3480 cartridges containing UM97520.) I don't see a 5.2 version of the "Guide for Automated Installation and Service." I'm assuming I should use the one for 5.1. After all, I'm actually applying the service to a 5.1 system anyway. Besides, the 5.1 and 5.2 manualsshould be pretty much identical, right? Thanks, Jon If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender, delete it and do not read, act upon, print, disclose, copy, retain or redistribute it. Click here for important additional terms relating to this e-mail. http://www.ml.com/email_terms/
Re: Upgrading zVM 5.1 to 5.2
we rec'ed 4 (3590) tapes for our upgrade. Haven't done it yet but just looked in the box and saw only 4. Mace
Re: Water cooling -- was: (off topic) sump pump
I read about this about 6wks ago. I read how it was new and innovative. The first thing I thought was Welcome to the 70s. I can remember the bi g 370s with the water pipes all over. But if you think about it Windows th e way it is written is about 30 yrs behind the mainframe OS. IMHO Mace
Re: Water cooling -- was: (off topic) sump pump
Gamers have been water cooling over clocked Intel and AMD cpus for quite some time. Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Larry Macioce Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 12:08 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject:Re: Water cooling -- was: (off topic) sump pump I read about this about 6wks ago. I read how it was new and innovative.= The first thing I thought was Welcome to the 70s. I can remember the bi= g 370s with the water pipes all over. But if you think about it Windows th= e way it is written is about 30 yrs behind the mainframe OS. IMHO Mace
Re: Water cooling -- was: (off topic) sump pump
Yep. Came close to doing it myself. Jon snip Gamers have been water cooling over clocked Intel and AMD cpus for quite some time. /snip
Re: Upgrading zVM 5.1 to 5.2
Title: Message I may have confused the issue as I was thinking 3480, not 3490. If both tapes are marked "5.2.0 Stacked RSU", then it does sound like an RSU (PUT is old school). There should be tapes marked "DDR something" with a 5.2.0 install. -Original Message-From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon BrockSent: Monday, May 15, 2006 4:31 PMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Re: Upgrading zVM 5.1 to 5.2 I thought I checked 3490 for delivery, but I must have missed that on this particular order. The docs that came with the order refer to the contents as "z/VM 5.2.0 Stacked RSU." It sounds like I must hie myself back to the labyrinth that is ShopzSeries. Time to stock up on breadcrumbs. If I do not return, give my love to mother. Thanks, Jon -Original Message-From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Stracka, James (GTI)Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 2:51 PMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Re: Upgrading zVM 5.1 to 5.2 That sounds like a PUT, not upgrade, you should get about 19 tapes to upgrade from 5.1. to 5.2 -Original Message-From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon BrockSent: Monday, May 15, 2006 2:49 PMTo: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDUSubject: Upgrading zVM 5.1 to 5.2 OK, I have ordered service to upgrade our z/VM from 5.1 to 5.2. (At least, I think I have. I got two 3480 cartridges containing UM97520.) I don't see a 5.2 version of the "Guide for Automated Installation and Service." I'm assuming I should use the one for 5.1. After all, I'm actually applying the service to a 5.1 system anyway. Besides, the 5.1 and 5.2 manualsshould be pretty much identical, right? Thanks, Jon If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender, delete it and do not read, act upon, print, disclose, copy, retain or redistribute it. Click here for important additional terms relating to this e-mail. http://www.ml.com/email_terms/
Msg 1QBEI
Help all We upgraded to a z.890 and z/VM 5.2 this weekend. Tonight one of our VSE jobs attempting to spool print to VM is getting: F1 0001 1QBEI INTERNAL MACRO CALL CPCOM FAILED IN PHASE=IPW$$LW , RC=7 FOR CSEK631 18177 ON LST,02E 21:13:30 F1 0001 1Q33I STOPPED LST,02E 21:13:30 Ive tried pointing it to different virtual printers iwith the sam results. The output viewed via FAQS looks fine. Any ideas or suggestions? TIA
Re: Msg 1QBEI
I know next to nothing about VSE. However, I do know how to use LookAt -- on the web at http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/zos/bkserv/lookat/. I sea rched on 1QBEI and found: 1QBEI INTERNAL MACRO CALL CPCOM FAILED IN PHASE=xxx, RC=rrr rr FOR jobname jobnumber [jobsuffix] ON taskid,cuu Explanation: A LST or PUN queue entry was processed by a list or punch ta sk, which has been started with the VM operand. When passing queue entry information from VS E/POWER to VM/CP, the internal macro call CPCOM has failed with return code r, presente d in decimal notation. Note: When jobname jobnumber is displayed as '-- --', no queue entry is c urrently accessed by the writer task. System Action: In nearly all cases VSE/POWER has requested an internal du mp for problem analysis. When currently passing the 'SPOOL' command to VM/CP, the addressed queue entry remains unchanged, an d the list/punch task is terminated. 'CLOSE' command to VM/CP, the addressed queue entry is held (disp DÿH, KÿL) in the queue, and list/punch task processing continues with subsequent queue entries. System Programmer Response: Use VM/ESA System Messages and Codes manual a nd locate the corresponding 'HCPrrrx' message for detailed failure explanation. Operator Response: Inform your system programmer about the failure return code. If required, restart the list/punch task, after the VM/CP interface has been corrected . No search hits found for: HCP7 No search hits found for: HCP0007 No search hits found for: HCP007 etc. I eventually came up with: HCP007E Invalid userid - userid Explanation: The user ID contains more than eight characters, or the user ID is not in the CP directory. If an external security manager (ESM) is installed on your sys tem, you may receive this message if you are not authorized to use this command. System Action: The command is not executed; system operation continues. User Response: Reissue the command with a valid user ID that is in the di rectory or contact your system administrator to obtain the necessary authorization. I'm not sure what, if anything in your message is a userid. Could be the userid of your VSE guest, I suppose. Authorization issue? Any recent change in a userid? Should be mo re information in the dump. On Mon, 15 May 2006 21:27:57 -0400, Hooker, Don - OIT [EMAIL PROTECTED] gov wrote: Help all - We upgraded to a z.890 and z/VM 5.2 this weekend. Tonight one of our VSE jobs attempting to spool print to VM is getting: F1 0001 1QBEI INTERNAL MACRO CALL CPCOM FAILED IN PHASE=IPW$$LW , RC=7 FOR CSEK631 18177 ON LST,02E 21:13:30 F1 0001 1Q33I STOPPED LST,02E 21:13:30 I've tried pointing it to different virtual printers iwith the sam results. The output viewed via FAQS looks fine. Any ideas or suggestions? TIA
